Tuning the Duplex (was ...Capo)

[Ron Nossaman]

>Thanks, all, for responding. But I'm puzzled ... the duplex is there for a 
>design reason, after all, which I presume is to create additional 
>harmonics and add to the esthetic quality of the tones.

Consider where the duplex(es) is (are). Starting with the killer octave... 
In my opinion, somewhat less then universally shared, the tuned front and 
rear duplex are intended to somewhat compensate for the fundamental design 
inefficiency of the soundboard assembly by making more noise in regions of 
the scale where the soundboard doesn't respond adequately. It's not a 
design reason (again, in my opinion), so much as a back-patch for a design 
deficiency.


>Sounds like the universal consensus is that the duplex is generally more 
>trouble than it's worth. *Not one* of you ever retunes the duplex??? (I 
>say this without yet having checked the archives for Ron Overs on 
>"detuning the duplex" but the title appears to substantiate my guess here.)

Not so - big time. Do, please, check the archives. There's at least a 
month's worth of reading on duplexes there. While you're reading, note the 
differences between font and rear duplexes, and the corresponding 
approaches for dealing with each, as well as the reasoning behind both the 
necessity and futility of either. Sorry, this is a homework assignment, 
which I always hated, but it's essential background for putting any duplex 
question in perspective.

Ron N